Nucleon, Inc.

Gary P. Pisano

Case | HBS Case Collection | November 1991 (Revised April 1994)

Nucleon, Inc.

Abstract

Nucleon is a small biotechnology company whose first potential product is about to enter clinical testing. Before Nucleon can begin clinical trials, however, its management must decide how and where to manufacture the product. Three options are being contemplated: 1) build an in-house pilot plant, 2) contract production to a third-party, 3) license the development, manufacturing, and marketing rights to a corporate partner. Allows discussion of a number of manufacturing strategy issues relevant to R&D-intensive entrepreneurial firms. A key issue is the strategic value of in-house manufacturing to a company that competes largely on very distinctive and specialized R&D capabilities.

Keywords: Factories, Labs, and Plants; Entrepreneurship; Health Testing and Trials; Rights; Product Development; Production; Partners and Partnerships; Research and Development; Biotechnology Industry;

Format: Print

16 pages

Educators Purchase

Citation:

Pisano, Gary P. "Nucleon, Inc." Harvard Business School Case 692-041, November 1991. (Revised April 1994.)

Creative Construction tackles the myth that larger enterprises are inherently incapable of transformative innovation and are doomed to be disrupted by nimble start-ups. If larger enterprises seem incapable of transformative innovation, it is due to how we design and manage them, rather than anything inherent in their scale. In fact, Creative Construction argues, if used properly, scale can be an asset, rather than a liability, when it comes to innovation. However, to leverage the advantages of scale for innovation, companies need the right combination of strategy, systems, and culture. Based on more than three decades of the Pisano's research, teaching, and experience, Creative Construction offers a set of principles that will lead readers to rethink many long-held beliefs about innovation.

Innovative cultures are generally depicted as pretty fun. They’re characterized by a tolerance for failure and a willingness to experiment. They’re seen as being psychologically safe, highly collaborative, and nonhierarchical. And research suggests that these behaviors translate into better innovative performance. But despite the fact that innovative cultures are desirable, and that most leaders claim to understand what they entail, they are hard to create and sustain. That’s because the easy-to-like behaviors that get so much attention are only one side of the coin. They must be counterbalanced by some tougher and frankly less fun behaviors: an intolerance for incompetence, rigorous discipline, brutal candor, a high level of individual accountability, and strong leadership. Unless the tensions created by this paradox are carefully managed, attempts to create an innovative culture will fail.

Faculty & Research

Nucleon, Inc.

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author